Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Harmon v. Bernett, 00-6963 (2000)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 00-6963 Visitors: 9
Filed: Nov. 02, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-6963 RAYMON REDMON HARMON, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MR. BERNETT, The Head Programmer at Craggy; MR. BLAKE, Programmer at Craggy; MISS CROMER, Programmer at Craggy, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Graham C. Mullen, Chief District Judge. (CA-00-39) Submitted: October 26, 2000 Decided: November 2, 2000 Before WIDENER, MICHA
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-6963 RAYMON REDMON HARMON, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MR. BERNETT, The Head Programmer at Craggy; MR. BLAKE, Programmer at Craggy; MISS CROMER, Programmer at Craggy, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Graham C. Mullen, Chief District Judge. (CA-00-39) Submitted: October 26, 2000 Decided: November 2, 2000 Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Raymon Redmon Harmon, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Raymond Harmon, a North Carolina inmate, appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2000) complaint under 28 U.S.C.A. § 1915(e)(2) (West Supp. 2000). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find that this appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court, and deny Harmon’s motion for appointment of counsel on appeal as moot. See Harmon v. Bernett, No. CA-00-39 (W.D.N.C. June 20, 2000). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequate- ly presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED 2
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer